Since Ruger addressed this issue 40 years ago, I have a hard time believing this guy has a chance. I think they are likely just hoping Ruger offers SOMETHING to make him go away. This would be like suing Ford because you crashed your 70s Ford and went through the windshield because it has no airbags
Idiot sueing Ruger
- Thread starter GunnyGene
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
Would you put your pregnant daughter or wife in a rear-wheel drive van without ABS, no airbags, in the winter with icy roads? Older Aerostar vans are set up that way, I used to have one and I was pretty good at keeping it on the Michigan roads but many people failed. I see that as similar to a three-screw that requires special knowledge compared to any modern handgun.48flyer said:
P89DC said:
So, in that case, are you as a father at fault, or is Ford?
While ABS is standard equipment nowadays, when it was introduced it was an "upgrade." Just because technology and consumer demands evolve, doesn't mean the original product had a defect.
Geoff Timm
Single-Sixer
If I am elected to congress (After I win the lotto the second time) I will spend 1/2 my staffs time finding stupid Federal Judges and writing bills of impeachment. I start with the vicious discrimination where a Supreme Court full of Harvard Lawyers finds in favor of other Harvard Lawyers again and again etc.
Geoff
Who is a mean motor scooter.
Geoff
Who is a mean motor scooter.
I would find the idea of depriving myself of my three prized custom Colt Peacemakers, because of the thought that some intellectually-challenged future owner after I die may possibly render himself a couple toes short, utterly ludicrous.
If I wanted, or owned, a 3-screw Blackhawk, exactly the same.
P89, I mean no offense, but your reasoning is extremely flawed.
If you extend it only slightly, you'd never buy a gun at all because of the remote possibility that some successor owner at some point, somewhere down the line, may injure somebody with it, somehow.
Denis
If I wanted, or owned, a 3-screw Blackhawk, exactly the same.
P89, I mean no offense, but your reasoning is extremely flawed.
If you extend it only slightly, you'd never buy a gun at all because of the remote possibility that some successor owner at some point, somewhere down the line, may injure somebody with it, somehow.
Denis
mohavesam
Hawkeye
Did this guy not understand that the ATV could hit a bump?
Alabama. - says a lot.
Alabama. - says a lot.
P89DC said:
Depends, here in Maine my road is covered with ice at least 3 mo. a year. the hard
pack quickly turns to ice. You learn quickly how to drive on ice.
It is NOT the manufactures
responsibility to educate a person of the proper handling of a 40 year old handgun.
Same with the state of Maine teaching folks to drive on ice!!. When I purchase a firearm
new to me I MAKE IT A POINT TO LEARN SAFE PRACTICES. that is YOUR responsibility NO ONE ELSES.. Lawyers are seeing dollar signs. ps
Pretty much what I would say. When a new gun is acquired (inherited, gunshow find, brand new, etc.), you learn about it and know exactly how it works and intended to be used and is it functioning correctly before you shoot it. That is your responsibility. Now, if the barrel falls off on the first shot, not your responsibility. It really is in your best interest to get an understanding of a tool that is intended to be used to kill something including yourself. There are so many 'resources' available now there is no excuse for unsafe practices or usage. Darwin missed an opportunity here, and it doesn't look like he learned anything as he is blaming the gun for his own misfortune. Pleading Ignorant is no excuse.
Wow! A serious slam on the great people in a great State :roll:mohavesam said:
mohavesam
Hawkeye
Focus... The OT remember?
So did the guy shoot himself in the ankle... or thoracic cavity? The article says both. Did the 'bama guy manage to shoot himself twice? Was has wearin' camo?
So did the guy shoot himself in the ankle... or thoracic cavity? The article says both. Did the 'bama guy manage to shoot himself twice? Was has wearin' camo?
Muley Gil
Blackhawk
lolbell said:Cholo said:
Article says he was in the "Free State of Winston" checking game cameras, so what does Alabama (my home) have to do with it?
The Free State of Winston was Winston County, Alabama. When the state of Alabama seceded from the Union in 1861, Winston County planned to secede from Alabama and remain loyal to the Union.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Winston
I went to Auburn University (Class of '77) and lived and worked in Alabama for a total of 29 years. Yes, there are some dumb folks there, but EVERY state has 'em also.
I'm from South Carolina. Lived here all of my 64+ years, and have learned repeatedly over the years that many folks here think the best way to deal with the local idiots is to elect them to public office.
In regards to the lawsuit. We live in a litigious society where many choose to lay blame for their folly on others and use the courts to profit from it. My solution is in order to bring a lawsuit you pay a fee of 10% of the amount you're suing for to the courts. If you win your fee is returned, and you are awarded the settlement. If you lose you forfeit the 10% fee. If a plaintiff didn't have the fee BUT the case had merit there would still be plenty of lawyers willing to take the case speculating on a favorable decision. Frivolous lawsuits would quickly decline.
Best Regards,
ADP3
In regards to the lawsuit. We live in a litigious society where many choose to lay blame for their folly on others and use the courts to profit from it. My solution is in order to bring a lawsuit you pay a fee of 10% of the amount you're suing for to the courts. If you win your fee is returned, and you are awarded the settlement. If you lose you forfeit the 10% fee. If a plaintiff didn't have the fee BUT the case had merit there would still be plenty of lawyers willing to take the case speculating on a favorable decision. Frivolous lawsuits would quickly decline.
Best Regards,
ADP3
gwpercle
Bearcat
Single action loading rule no. 1
Load one chamber
Skip one chamber (leave it empty)
Load four more chamber
Bring hammer to full cock
Ease hammer down on EMPTY chamber
Rule no.2
Idiots shouldn't carry single action revolvers if they cant follow rule number 1.
He better hope I'm not on the jury...he wont get doodley-squat and him and his lawyer will be paying Ruger's legal fees.
Gary
Load one chamber
Skip one chamber (leave it empty)
Load four more chamber
Bring hammer to full cock
Ease hammer down on EMPTY chamber
Rule no.2
Idiots shouldn't carry single action revolvers if they cant follow rule number 1.
He better hope I'm not on the jury...he wont get doodley-squat and him and his lawyer will be paying Ruger's legal fees.
Gary
Tom W
Blackhawk
Not to mention the hunting club for having bumpy roads.
I do not know if it is the case here but often the person injured in an accident is not the one who initiates the suit. They just turn in their medical bills to their medical insurance company. The insurance company tries to recover their losses by suing in the injured person's name. The typical insurance contract gives them the right to do so. The person who had the accident is powerless to stop the suit.
contender
Ruger Guru
But,,, if the injured person is not involved in the case,,, especially with his testimony,,, many cases can get shut down quickly.
Either party in a civil suit can have witnesses summoned. The witnesses can not get out of answering questions by taking the 5th. Failing to appear or failing to answer questions places them in contempt of court for which they do not have a right to trial before being punished. Claiming they do not remember risks pissing off the judge who alone selects the punishment for contempt of his or her court.
In this case the police report would also be available and presumably it contains the injured man's account of the accident. The attorney can simply hand him the statement he made to the police and demand read this then ask did you file a false police report or commit perjury in that report?
Finally there is the real motivation to testify. The insurance contract no doubt makes payment of the claim contingent upon co-operating.
In this case the police report would also be available and presumably it contains the injured man's account of the accident. The attorney can simply hand him the statement he made to the police and demand read this then ask did you file a false police report or commit perjury in that report?
Finally there is the real motivation to testify. The insurance contract no doubt makes payment of the claim contingent upon co-operating.
